Hoopla over National Conference report

At the point that President Goodluck Jonathan decided to inaugurate his National Conference, a cross section of Nigeria raised questions over the necessity of such a conference at a time the nation was confronted with myriads of socio-political and economic problems. There was, and still the ferocious bloody campaign by the insurgents, Boko Haram engaged in a macabre of killing in the North-east. This is in addition to the helplessness of the state and inability of the security forces to rein in the cancerous group that has taken their fighting capability and professionalism to the cleaner.

In the face of all this, some analysts therefore, dismissed the conference as diversionary and a huge distraction. Those in this school of thought were of the opinions that assuming a conference were even necessary; we had glossed over the basic issue of legal framework for such conference. A presidential diktat and fiat would not just be enough when we get to the point of implementation of the conference’s decisions, having been placed on nothing. In our mute indifference and usual docility, the President has spoken, any dissension is unpatriotic, and so the conference went ahead thereby putting the cart before the horse.

For such a crucial conference to address fundamental issues affecting the corporate existence and survival of the country, members were hand-picked, nominated, or appointed by the President and his men; whatever criteria they used. No input from people whose destiny were to be discussed because of the disdain with which those in authority treat the ordinary citizens of this country.

The conspicuous scenes at the conference were empty chairs of absentee members, tired and snoring geriatrics, and spent political horses. From what we know about some of the conferees from their antecedents and remarks on national issues, they were mostly divisive ethnic chauvinists and irredentists. Others were a cross-section of professionals, bureaucrats, civil society activists who speak from both sides of their mouth. However, there were incidentally, a few patriots whose voices were lost in the cacophony of Babel from the dominant pro-establishment elements in the conference.

During their proceedings, we saw caucuses formed around mostly ethnic, sectarian and religious affiliations. Footages from the proceedings clearly showed that some members from their utterances had no business being there for a serious conference to chart a roadmap for Nigeria. Now we are at a critical juncture as to what to do with the report of the conference. The President has told the nation that he was going to forward the report to the National Assembly.

Wait a minute! If the President had so much confidence in the National Assembly, why did he not wake them up to their constitutional duty clearly spelt out in Section 4(2) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic as amended? What is in the so-called report of the conference?

A cursory look at bits and pieces from the report of the conference showed that among other things, they recommended that the touchy issue of subsidy on petroleum products be removed. Whatever their reason, it was obvious that they preferred to treat the symptom of the sickness rather than the cause of the ailment or disease. They shied away from tackling the official corruption responsible for the failure of the subsidy scheme so as to soothe and massage the ego of their principal. They preferred that the Nigerian masses should subsidize the ineptitude and corruption of the ruling class.

Furthermore, the conferences excitedly recommended the creation of 19 additional states across the country. These same “knowledgeable” Nigerians with whatever credentials they have know full well that not even 10 out of the 36 states are viable enough to meet up their running cost. Are these the sort of recommendations we so eagerly want to be in the so-called new constitution that they want to bequeath to Nigerians?

I say with humility that the 1999 Nigerian Constitution as amended is one of the best documents in constitutional jurisprudential craftsmanship anywhere in the world. It may not have been a perfect document as there never would be one, but the imperfection could be laundered to make room for the vision we want; a vision of cohesive Nigeria based on true federalism. If we are a courageous people and want to build a true democracy founded on the rule of law, then, we should make Chapter Two of the Constitution, which is on Fundamental Objective and Directive Principles of State Policy justice-able. All we need to do is to repeal or expunge Section 6(6)(c) of the 1999 Constitution as amended. Furthermore, we could look at the immunity clauses and a few other sections that appear to deify elected officials and make above the law.

It is becoming apparent that the so-called National Conference was driven and actuated by political motive. If it were so as it appears to be, it has apparently served its purpose: diversion and waste, period. Now we should have our focus on the 2015 general elections while the report of the conference gather dust and in no time melt away like others before it. Assuming that there was anything good in the report, there is nothing in the 1999 Nigerian Constitution as amended that says that it could not go for a referendum; notwithstanding the fact that it was not so mentioned expressly in Section 9 of the Constitution, which deals with amendment. I listened with interest to the views of some legal minds expressed about referendum. I found most of the views rather pedestrian and pedantic and do not reflect the doctrine and principle of law as a tool for social engineering. I say again with humility that interpretation of law should not be reduced to dead letters of the alphabet, which most legal scholars refer to as literary canon of interpretation. Growth in law is better made not by anachronistic attachment to conservatism but liberal and bold interpretation through progressive legal activism.

Nigerians needed not to have expected much from the National Conference whose outcome was quite predictable. We should be worried that extremists are over running our country, and giving our security forces bloody nose. We should be concerned that after five months, the Chibok girls are still in captivity with little hope in sight for their rescue. We should be bothered that confidence in our national institutions is eroding rapidly. We should be concerned that kidnappers and armed robbers have set loops round our necks in the southern part of the country. We should be worried about cultists ravaging communities in the Niger Delta.

Rather than the hullabaloo over the conference, we should come together resolutely to remove through democratic means, the vermin, parasites and political vampires who make us look poor and helpless in the eyes of the world. Nigerians should demand the strengthening of institutions so as to build a new Nigeria. We should begin to cultivate the habit of looking at issues not through ethnic or religious prisms, but through objective and balanced view for the common good. We should compel our government and indeed the political class to show good conscience and be exemplary to drive our institutions to building a better Nigeria. The National Conference has come and gone but the solution to the myriads of problems in Nigeria lies with us to develop human capacity for positive change.